Community
Search
Notices
Gas Engines Questions or comments about gas engines can be posted here

Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-12-2007 | 11:30 PM
  #1  
Thread Starter
Junior Member
My Feedback: (37)
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Nutley, NJ
Default Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

I have been thinking about getting a Taurus 52 for a Midwest Super Stinker. I plan to reinforce the firewall area a bit.

Will this be too much engine for this plane. Or will the Taurus 42 be good enough for unlimited vertical?

Thanks
Old 07-13-2007 | 12:17 AM
  #2  
camss69's Avatar
My Feedback: (46)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,039
Received 82 Likes on 62 Posts
From: Cameron Park, CA
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

I don't think he sells the 42 anymore.
Old 07-13-2007 | 07:32 AM
  #3  
JoeAirPort's Avatar
My Feedback: (41)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,259
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
From: Milwaukee, WI
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

Too much engine for my type of flying (too much weight..the power is great). If you burn holes in the sky and can land with a high wing loading you could do it. My buddy has a Brellelli 46 in his and likes it.
Old 07-13-2007 | 08:40 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 18,602
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
From: Valley Springs, CA
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

I was talking with Bill at Taurus yesterday. If you can get him to make you up a 2.4 I would go for it. If not then I don't know what to say. There IS NOT a better 2.4 to 3.2 engine on the market. Nobody has even equal the power, and nobody can come close to the manufactured quality. You can have cheap or you can have super quality with a long, lng life. You can't get both.

It's a tough choice to make. I'm sorry to say that most choose cheap.
Old 07-13-2007 | 07:30 PM
  #5  
ChickenStick Rick's Avatar
My Feedback: (674)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Charlotte, NC
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

If you talk with Bill at Taurus, he will tell you the 52 is only 2 ounces heavier than the forty two. That is why he is not making the 42's anymore.

That plane was designed around a Moki 180 two stroke glow engine. If you want gas, I would certainly look for a lightweight 40 cc motor.

Good Luck
Old 07-13-2007 | 07:58 PM
  #6  
Don M.'s Avatar
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Halifax, NS, CANADA
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

I have a TS52 and am building ( very slowly ) a MW Super Stinker. I'm not 100% sure what engine I'm going to use but it WON'T be the TS52. Too heavy and MUCH more power than needed. I also have a Brison 2.4 and that's probably what will end up in it. But I'm also considering a Saito 220 or the 2.20 gasser if it ever arrives "over here"
Old 07-13-2007 | 08:06 PM
  #7  
Jake Ruddy's Avatar
Senior Member
My Feedback: (40)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 4,105
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Bear, DE
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

Well... in my mind there is nothing wrong with a Brillelli 46 or even the 50. Both are lighter and less money.. make great power for something like this.

Taurus makes a great 52 no doubt... had one. However a lot more money and un needed power for this application. Can't say the 52 is perfect though... I sold that plane to my buddy and the 52 is back in the shop for the 3rd time in the last yr with maybe 15 flights on that plane. I keep telling him that it's unusal but he's not too impressed right now to say the least. Service time is also a bit slow... sat there for 2 weeks the last 2 times it was in.
Old 07-13-2007 | 09:18 PM
  #8  
My Feedback: (19)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,380
Received 49 Likes on 48 Posts
From: Des Moines, IA
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker


ORIGINAL: sinergy

Well... in my mind there is nothing wrong with a Brillelli 46 or even the 50. Both are lighter and less money.. make great power for something like this.

Taurus makes a great 52 no doubt... had one. However a lot more money and un needed power for this application. Can't say the 52 is perfect though... I sold that plane to my buddy and the 52 is back in the shop for the 3rd time in the last yr with maybe 15 flights on that plane. I keep telling him that it's unusal but he's not too impressed right now to say the least. Service time is also a bit slow... sat there for 2 weeks the last 2 times it was in.
Sinergy,

What kinds of problems has your friend had with his Taurus? I just love mine so far and it is flying while my DA-50 went to the hospital!!
Old 07-13-2007 | 10:26 PM
  #9  
Don M.'s Avatar
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Halifax, NS, CANADA
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

ORIGINAL: sinergy

Can't say the 52 is perfect though... I sold that plane to my buddy and the 52 is back in the shop for the 3rd time in the last yr with maybe 15 flights on that plane. I keep telling him that it's unusal but he's not too impressed right now to say the least. Service time is also a bit slow... sat there for 2 weeks the last 2 times it was in.

Ain't that funny I've got 12 flights on my TS52 and it's been back to Taurus 3 times also. And no I won't get into the particulars of it. Been there, done that and moved on []
Old 07-13-2007 | 10:55 PM
  #10  
Jake Ruddy's Avatar
Senior Member
My Feedback: (40)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 4,105
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Bear, DE
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

ORIGINAL: Truckracer


ORIGINAL: sinergy

Well... in my mind there is nothing wrong with a Brillelli 46 or even the 50. Both are lighter and less money.. make great power for something like this.

Taurus makes a great 52 no doubt... had one. However a lot more money and un needed power for this application. Can't say the 52 is perfect though... I sold that plane to my buddy and the 52 is back in the shop for the 3rd time in the last yr with maybe 15 flights on that plane. I keep telling him that it's unusal but he's not too impressed right now to say the least. Service time is also a bit slow... sat there for 2 weeks the last 2 times it was in.
Sinergy,

What kinds of problems has your friend had with his Taurus? I just love mine so far and it is flying while my DA-50 went to the hospital!!
well its going back for the 2nd time right now because of the same prob... breaking up in flight. When it came back it flew great for 5 mins then all the sudden at full throttle it started breaking up. Does it from 1/4 throttle to full. Its not the battery or switch either... its the carb or ignition I would say. I cant remember what it went in for the first time.

Last time it sat there for 2 weeks and when my buddy called in to ask how it was doing the response he got from Bill was "Ya I am getting to it.. will look at it in the next day or 2"

Either way I cant really complain aboiut the engine... when it runs its smooth and super strong.. my buddy is just frustrated and I am stuck in the middle cuz I sold it



Old 07-14-2007 | 12:25 AM
  #11  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 18,602
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
From: Valley Springs, CA
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

Breaking up in flight has to be only the carb or the ignition. If the ignition is working and there's no shorts in the electricals I would look to cleaning out the carb. I would also be certain that the fuel was filtered, preferable with a filter prior to reaching the carb. At times a poor mixture will foul a plug causing a miss. So will a loose timing ring where the set screws loosened up in flight from an unbalanced propeller. Too many things that can go wrong having nothing to do with the engine itself.

Not saying this is the case but there are far more people that can't tune a carb than those that can. Even fewer that can actually work with simple engines and fix minor induction or spark issues. Checking and adjusting timing seems to be out of reach for most. But we'll always blame the engine and spend $30.00 to send it back rather than spend $5.00 or some time to correct something simple.

There is nothing mechanical inside a Taurus or most any other gasser that can cause the issue. It's not possible. Therefore the issue is not with the engine, but like so many others, accessories.
Old 07-14-2007 | 08:29 AM
  #12  
Jake Ruddy's Avatar
Senior Member
My Feedback: (40)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 4,105
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Bear, DE
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

Well I will guarantee it's tuned correctly because I am the only one who touches the needles.

I also took apart the carb and cleaned it as well as tried brand new batteries to make sure that was not the issue. The problem is it was doing the exact same thing when it went in and sat for 2 weeks... it was a broken ground somewhere ( I dont know I didn't speak with Bill personally) and then it last 4 or 5 mins of doing circles and acted up again doing the similar thing. We didn't have a spare plug handy to try. I am pretty sure it's electrical and I don't really take ignitions apart and repair them... not my field

I can't remember why it went in the first time but it was a different problem all together.

I have the ability and knowledge to go over the timing but quite frankly I have enough on my plate then to be working on other people's engines that just came back from being "repaired" I am not knocking Taurus.. just stating recent experience with them.
Old 07-14-2007 | 10:16 AM
  #13  
Don M.'s Avatar
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: Halifax, NS, CANADA
Default RE: Taurus 52 for Midwest SuperStinker

I'm only entering into this discussion in order to help a fellow modeler but one of the problems I had with my TS52 was exactly as you stated, breaking down, backfiring, etc. After a lot of "discussions" with Taurus I sent it back and they replaced the ignition - end of problem - at least that one.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.